JMPD lauded for 'doing the right thing'

© Mikael Damkier – 123RF.com

This section prescribes that "any document required to be served on an infringer in terms of this act must be served on the infringer personally or sent by registered mail to his or her last known address".

It was on this basis that JPSA, chaired by Howard Dembovsky, lodged a complaint with the Public Protector, Thuli Madonsela, in June 2011 which resulted in the JMPD being found to have engaged in maladministration. In her report in December 2014, the remedial action recommended was for the JMPD to print an apology in Johannesburg newspapers, which was done in March.

At around the same time, the JMPD stated in a media conference that members of the public who had received such unlawful fines would have to "apply to have them cancelled". JPSA says that it immediately wrote to both the JMPD and Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA) pointing out the administrative burden this "solution" would place on the public, the RTIA and the JMPD. JPSA says it also pointed out that the JMPD was continuing to collect revenues on illegally issued infringement notices.

"This, coupled with the public protector's report, has apparently had the desired effect," says JPSA.

In addition, the JMPD has also cancelled all Aarto infringement notices it issued which were not entered into the National Contraventions Register as is prescribed by the Aarto Act according to JPSA. This affects all Aarto infringement notices starting with the prefix 02-4024 it issued since April 1 2009 but does not affect lawful Aarto infringement notices which were issued in compliance with the act, through the National Contraventions Register which runs on the eNatis registry, nor does it affect "no admission of guilt" criminal offences, says JPSA.

Motorists who use the payCity website will notice that all infringement notices starting with the prefix 02-4024 displayed on that website now show the status "case is already finalised", which means that motorists will no longer be required to submit representations for each and every one of them, including but not limited to the infringement notices sent by ordinary mail. According to JPSA, motorists should also no longer be intimidated over these unlawful fines in roadblocks established by the JMPD.

"JPSA wishes to commend the JMPD for finally coming clean, complying with the law and doing the right thing in this matter. We also wish to commend them for going further than merely complying with the report of the public protector."

The last time anything like this happened was in 2009 when the JMPD programmatically cancelled all of the illegal fines it issued under the Criminal Procedure Act from November 1 2008 to February 11 2009 when it should have been issuing them in terms of the Aarto Act. The significant difference between then and now was that in 2009 it undertook to refund motorists who had paid unlawfully issued fines, but this time around is claiming that "a motorist who has paid the fine has admitted guilt and therefore is not entitled to a refund".

JPSA says it disagrees with this assertion, "given that the JMPD is notorious for setting up roadblocks where metro police officers intimidate people into paying fines under threat of arrest and/or detention, even though the Aarto Act does not cater for warrants of arrest for infringement notices.

"We hold that coercion does not constitute 'admission of guilt'.

"Only when traffic law enforcement in SA is practiced in an ethical and corruption-free manner which complies fully with the law will people begin to respect and comply with the law."

Source: Business Day